Talk:Hill fort

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Archaeology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Archaeology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchaeologyWikipedia:WikiProject ArchaeologyTemplate:WikiProject ArchaeologyArchaeology articles

Norse history and culture

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Norse history and culture, a WikiProject related to all activities of the North Germanic peoples, both in Scandinavia and abroad, prior to the formation of the Kalmar Union in 1397. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Norse history and cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Norse history and cultureTemplate:WikiProject Norse history and cultureNorse history and culture articles

Comments[edit]

This seems like a dup of hill fort; if not, it needs to explain the distinction. Stan 16:51, 10 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

drat should have checked though in my defence the author(s) of hill fort refer to them as hillforts and even hill-forts. They are the same thing though. I'd argue hillfort is the proper archaeological rendering anyway but then I wrote that one. Probably needs a debate somewhere adamsan 16:58, 10 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

A Google sniff, plus a check of which seems most common in books by searching Amazon, should be sufficient - I doubt anybody will make a big deal either way. (What I find amusing is to Google both together, see how many pages use both on the same page!) Stan 17:36, 10 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I pulled as much text as would fit into the hill fort article, which gave me an excuse to reorganize the materials there. (When I wrote the original article, my sources claimed that hill forts were unique to Britain -- a claim I should have known better than to accept.) At least now it gives more attention to the rest of Europe, & ought to stand until someone insists that the Acropolis is a hill fort, yet only called by another name.

I didn't turn this article into a redirect to the other because (1) folks should discuss which is the better term, & (2) some may think that I have a conflict of interest here. (A space, a hyphen, or compounding into one word? I really don't care, but would like to see some evidence of use or preferred style before I bow to anyone's argument.) -- llywrch 02:53, 11 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Splendid. I have started a discussion in Talk:Archaeology to see what everyone there thinks there. adamsan 14:17, 11 May 2004 (UTC)~[reply]